|
sterlingjim
Jun 4, 2006, 3:20 PM
Post #301 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2006
Posts: 251
|
In reply to: It was funny. Can I have last week's rope?
Sorry Curt, Ambler got them all.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jun 4, 2006, 10:03 PM
Post #303 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
Sooooo that is what a red rope looks like after being soaked in battery acid. :shock: :lol:
Wow nice cobbles. How much fun would that cliff be to climb on.
|
|
|
|
|
ambler
Jun 5, 2006, 12:39 PM
Post #304 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2002
Posts: 1690
|
In reply to: Wow nice cobbles. How much fun would that cliff be to climb on. |
|
|
|
|
cellardoor
Jun 5, 2006, 2:23 PM
Post #305 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 16, 2005
Posts: 206
|
Lol, no wonder, i looked at that pic and was like wtf is he doing?
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jun 5, 2006, 7:48 PM
Post #306 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: JT, Just for the record, in my Alfa Romeo Spider, the battery is located in the trunk.
And let me guess: your rope is, too.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Jun 8, 2006, 8:14 PM
Post #307 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
1. As near as I can tell, the actually history of the rope in question is still not known.
2. This thread confirms my belief that intentionally falling is often not a good idea, except in certain circumstances.
3. I buy a new lead rope at least every 1.5 to 2 years depending on how much I use it. Who knows if that would have made a difference in this case, but . . .
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 8, 2006, 8:24 PM
Post #308 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: 1. As near as I can tell, the actually history of the rope in question is still not known. 2. This thread confirms my belief that intentionally falling is often not a good idea, except in certain circumstances. 3. I buy a new lead rope at least every 1.5 to 2 years depending on how much I use it. Who knows if that would have made a difference in this case, but . . .
You have an excellent thought in both 1 and 3.
Worthy of Sherlock Holmes.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jun 8, 2006, 8:49 PM
Post #309 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: 1. As near as I can tell, the actually history of the rope in question is still not known. 2. This thread confirms my belief that intentionally falling is often not a good idea, except in certain circumstances. 3. I buy a new lead rope at least every 1.5 to 2 years depending on how much I use it. Who knows if that would have made a difference in this case, but . . . You have an excellent thought in both 1 and 3. Worthy of Sherlock Holmes.
But as far as number #2 goes, his risk-benefit analysis skills could use a little fine tuning.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 8, 2006, 9:01 PM
Post #310 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: 1. As near as I can tell, the actually history of the rope in question is still not known. 2. This thread confirms my belief that intentionally falling is often not a good idea, except in certain circumstances. 3. I buy a new lead rope at least every 1.5 to 2 years depending on how much I use it. Who knows if that would have made a difference in this case, but . . . You have an excellent thought in both 1 and 3. Worthy of Sherlock Holmes. But as far as number #2 goes, his risk-benefit analysis skills could use a little fine tuning. Jay
"Always with the negative waves, Moriarity, aways with the negative waves!!!"-- Oddball, in the movie, Kelly's Heros
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jun 8, 2006, 9:25 PM
Post #311 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: 1. As near as I can tell, the actually history of the rope in question is still not known. 2. This thread confirms my belief that intentionally falling is often not a good idea, except in certain circumstances. 3. I buy a new lead rope at least every 1.5 to 2 years depending on how much I use it. Who knows if that would have made a difference in this case, but . . . You have an excellent thought in both 1 and 3. Worthy of Sherlock Holmes. But as far as number #2 goes, his risk-benefit analysis skills could use a little fine tuning. Jay "Always with the negative waves, Moriarity, aways with the negative waves!!!"-- Oddball, in the movie, Kelly's Heros
Hmph, I thought I phrased that very positively!
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Jun 8, 2006, 10:47 PM
Post #312 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: 1. As near as I can tell, the actually history of the rope in question is still not known. 2. This thread confirms my belief that intentionally falling is often not a good idea, except in certain circumstances. 3. I buy a new lead rope at least every 1.5 to 2 years depending on how much I use it. Who knows if that would have made a difference in this case, but . . . You have an excellent thought in both 1 and 3. Worthy of Sherlock Holmes. But as far as number #2 goes, his risk-benefit analysis skills could use a little fine tuning. Jay "Always with the negative waves, Moriarity, aways with the negative waves!!!"-- Oddball, in the movie, Kelly's Heros Hmph, I thought I phrased that very positively! Jay
I've seen enough bad things happen in very short falls, including the shattering of my own ankle, to know that it's not a good idea to lose control of one's body, unless the alternative is worse.
Risk=intense pain and a brand new $10,000 ankle.
Benefit=remind me again?
I'd say I've got that analysis down just fine. :wink:
The fall we are discussing happened in about the safest possible environment, yet somebody could have been killed or seriously injured. Risk/benefit?
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jun 8, 2006, 11:19 PM
Post #313 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: 1. As near as I can tell, the actually history of the rope in question is still not known. 2. This thread confirms my belief that intentionally falling is often not a good idea, except in certain circumstances. 3. I buy a new lead rope at least every 1.5 to 2 years depending on how much I use it. Who knows if that would have made a difference in this case, but . . . You have an excellent thought in both 1 and 3. Worthy of Sherlock Holmes. But as far as number #2 goes, his risk-benefit analysis skills could use a little fine tuning. Jay "Always with the negative waves, Moriarity, aways with the negative waves!!!"-- Oddball, in the movie, Kelly's Heros Hmph, I thought I phrased that very positively! Jay I've seen enough bad things happen in very short falls, including the shattering of my own ankle, to know that it's not a good idea to lose control of one's body, unless the alternative is worse. Risk=intense pain and a brand new $10,000 ankle. Benefit=remind me again? I'd say I've got that analysis down just fine. :wink: The fall we are discussing happened in about the safest possible environment, yet somebody could have been killed or seriously injured. Risk/benefit?
We're talking about intentional falls. If you took an intentional fall in a situation where you could shatter your ankle, then your judgment was poor. But that incident has nothing to do with your stated belief that a freak rope breaking incident should dissuade you further from taking intentional falls. This incident should have no baring on your opinion of intentional falls because it is so rare. You have a higher probability by several orders of magnitude of getting severely injured in a car accident on your way to and from the gym than you would by a rope in good condition breaking in the gym.
I'll be happy to remind you about the benefits of intentional falls. First, they are the most useful tool at your disposal to learn to overcome irrational fear of falling. In turn, this allows you to climb harder, with greater commitment, and to have more fun while doing so. Second, they teach you how to fall, so that you will be less likely to get injured in your uninentional falls.
What is the risk? If you use good judgment as to choice of where to fall (high on routes that overhang), with what protection (bomb-proof) and with what belayer (a dynamic one), then the risk is miniscule.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 8, 2006, 11:40 PM
Post #314 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
My point was that the thoughts in 1 and 3 are rather relevant to the issue that started this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Jun 9, 2006, 7:37 AM
Post #315 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
My points
who wants to bid on
6 pack of beer @ 32000 + - 250 view by July 4
12 pack of beer @ 36000 + - 250 view by end of July
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Jun 9, 2006, 10:47 PM
Post #316 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
In reply to: We're talking about intentional falls. If you took an intentional fall in a situation where you could shatter your ankle, then your judgment was poor. But that incident has nothing to do with your stated belief that a freak rope breaking incident should dissuade you further from taking intentional falls. This incident should have no baring on your opinion of intentional falls because it is so rare. You have a higher probability by several orders of magnitude of getting severely injured in a car accident on your way to and from the gym than you would by a rope in good condition breaking in the gym. I'll be happy to remind you about the benefits of intentional falls. First, they are the most useful tool at your disposal to learn to overcome irrational fear of falling. In turn, this allows you to climb harder, with greater commitment, and to have more fun while doing so. Second, they teach you how to fall, so that you will be less likely to get injured in your uninentional falls. What is the risk? If you use good judgment as to choice of where to fall (high on routes that overhang), with what protection (bomb-proof) and with what belayer (a dynamic one), then the risk is miniscule. Jay
I didn't break my ankle in an intentional fall, I'm just using the example to illustrate how very short falls can have very bad outcomes, and, as this fall illustrates, our expectations of what will happen when we cut loose from the wall can be very, very wrong, even if the chances are miniscule. It only takes one really bad outcome to ruin your day. The faller in this case didn't think he was risking much when he jumped, and the odds were very much in his favor, moreso than any other falling situation I can imagine. Turns out he was risking his life. Who 'da thunk it, huh?
Probability is a funny thing because if one can exert control over a situation then probability flies out the window. I'm in control of the situation when I'm behind the wheel. When I fall I no longer have control of the situation.
I never had to practice how to fall. I find that climbing until I can't climb anymore, then falling, to be pleny of practice for me. In fact, I'm very good at falling. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
md3
Jun 9, 2006, 11:23 PM
Post #317 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2004
Posts: 172
|
Please shut up about the merits of avoiding falling. I don’t want to check this thread again until there is some new information on the analysis of the broken rope.
|
|
|
|
|
devils_advocate
Jun 9, 2006, 11:24 PM
Post #318 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2006
Posts: 1823
|
In reply to: Probability is a funny thing because if one can exert control over a situation then probability flies out the window. I'm in control of the situation when I'm behind the wheel. When I fall I no longer have control of the situation.
We're already well off topic, so what the hell:
You may have control of your car while behind the wheel (providing the car never fails unexpectedly) - now if you can just find a place to drive where you are the only person on the road, you actually may have control of the situation. I think its arguable that you have control over more variables while falling than while driving.
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Jun 9, 2006, 11:50 PM
Post #319 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
In reply to: Please shut up about the merits of avoiding falling. I don’t want to check this thread again until there is some new information on the analysis of the broken rope.
Gosh, I'm so sorry for not following your rules. Next time I'll just PM you and ask for your permission to post. Can you say "control issues"?
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Jun 10, 2006, 12:01 AM
Post #320 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
In reply to: You may have control of your car while behind the wheel (providing the car never fails unexpectedly) - now if you can just find a place to drive where you are the only person on the road, you actually may have control of the situation. I think its arguable that you have control over more variables while falling than while driving.
I don't disagree with you about the other knuckleheads on the road, however, the point was about probabilities. No, I don't control all the variables when driving, but I think I can control enough of them to render Jay's probability argument irrellevant. I've never been injured in a car, but I have while climbing, and I've spent a hell of a lot more time in a car than climbing. Not that that proves the point, but it illustrates if for me.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jun 10, 2006, 12:11 AM
Post #321 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
There is a HUGE difference in wishing to avoid a fall and being prepared for a fall that happens.
Let's discuss that somewhere else, more fitting, OK?
Can we get back to rope troubles now?
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Jun 10, 2006, 12:18 AM
Post #322 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
The situation that led to this accident was created by an intentional fall. I think think it's entirely on subject. Besides, this is MY internet, not yours. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
sterlingjim
Jun 10, 2006, 1:01 AM
Post #323 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2006
Posts: 251
|
Actually it was the climber leaving the ground that created the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Jun 10, 2006, 1:06 AM
Post #324 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Actually it was the climber leaving the ground that created the situation.
Funny, I thought it was the climber hitting the ground that was the problem. God, it's just so complicated. :lol:
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
sterlingjim
Jun 10, 2006, 1:21 AM
Post #325 of 358
(38423 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2006
Posts: 251
|
In reply to: In reply to: Actually it was the climber leaving the ground that created the situation. Funny, I thought it was the climber hitting the ground that was the problem. God, it's just so complicated. :lol: Curt
It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop at the bottom. -anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
|
